CA salary issue may be resolved
By Melinda L. Lucas
Topping off a two-week exchange between county elected officials that occasionally caused tempers to flare, county attorney Rollin Rauschl made a statement on Monday that he intends to absorb a loss in income “to the extent of $19,000.”
After being notified by the State Comptroller’s office in August that the state has been sending the wrong amount for its portion of the CA salary for the past two years, county judge Robert Skelton and the commissioners had looked at a couple of options to try to make up at least part of the difference.
Rauschl received a state supplement of $42,000 for each of his first two years of office, the same as previous CA Colton Johnson, instead of the $35,000 state supplement that is legislated for 1-3 years experience. The other portion of his salary, $33,124, comes from the county.
The error came to light about two weeks ago and has been a major topic of discussion at two regular commissioners meetings, as well as a special session on Friday, Sept. 9, when it was the only item on the agenda.
Skelton explained that Rauschl had been overpaid a total of $11,667 by the state for 2021 and 2022, and he would receive $7,000 less than expected for 2023 ($35,000 rather than $42,000) for a total of $18,667 less for the three-year period than the CA had been told would be his salary when he filed for office.
On Aug. 29, Skelton presented a possible plan to pay the CA for 94 hours of civil work voluntarily performed for the county during his first 18 months in office, since the CA is a misdemeanor criminal prosecutor and his duties do not include civil work. Rauschl later submitted a bill from his private office for 100 hours totalling $17,500.
Skelton said Tuesday that he was continuing to investigate legalities about paying Rauschl but had not received answers from the Texas Association of Counties. In the meantime, however, Rauschl issued his statement that he would “suffer the financial impacts of error,” with plans to reopen his law practice in Albany in order to supplement his income.
“The efforts to mitigate the financial impact of the reduction...could not be accomplished due to constitutional restrictions for payment of past services rendered,” said Rauschl in his written statement.
At press time, the issue was not included on the Sept. 26 meeting agenda, and Rauschl told the News on Monday that he “wants this to be the last time it comes up,” emphasizing he had decided to absorb the $11,667 that will be shorted in the state supplement in 2023.
Budget, Tax Rate Proposals
After about six weeks of budget workshops, commissioners proposed a budget and tax rate at their regular meeting on Monday, Sept. 12, with plans to adopt after a required public hearing on Sept. 26.
The proposed budget of $4,559,769 is $150,156 more than last year’s budget, and includes a 5% cost of living increase of county employees.
Skelton noted that the budget total also covers $12,000 more for the county’s portion of the appraisal district expenses, state-mandated higher fees for court-appointed attorneys, a significant rise in property insurance because county property has been reappraised to the historical replacement value, some IT upgrades, and future civil legal representation.
Cody Jordan made the motion to propose the deficit budget of $4,559.769 (revenue projections are $4,463,790), approved by a 5-0 vote including Skelton.
The budget is based on an M&O tax rate of 57 cents, which when added to the I&S rate of 6.65 cents to pay debt, totals 63.65 cents and is calculated to generate $3,666,626. It is less than last year’s rate of 65.06 because of higher valuations. The “no new revenue” rate is 60.69 cents.
Separate motions made by Lanham Martin and Jordan passed unanimously.
The required public hearing was set for 8:30 a.m. Sept. 26 in the courtroom, after which the budget and tax rate are expected to be approved.
